Thursday Open Thread | Fox News anchor Kelly Wright says he can no longer ignore racism at the network

At a news conference on Wednesday, news anchor Kelly Wright spoke to reporters about the second lawsuit lodged against Fox News this year for racial discrimination. As the only black anchor on Fox, Wright can be a more public face for the accusations, as the suit filed in March pertained to discrimination in the administrative sector of the corporation.

Variety reports that the conference was held at the offices of Wigdor LLC law firm, attorneys representing Wright and several other plaintiffs named in the suit. Wright spoke to the fact that aside from himself, there are only a handful of black and Latino reporters at Fox News:

“In 2017, that should not be the case,” Wright said, calling it “indefensible and inexcusable” given the talent pool available. “It speaks volumes (about) the disregard to equality at Fox News.”
According to Wright, he has frequently urged the company to produce special or cover issues that might reach a more diverse viewing public, but says these requests fell “on deaf ears.”

“Our leaders simply overlook the value of diversity and inclusion in the workplace,” continued Wright, “We can definitely do better.”

The New York Daily News reports that Wright claims he struggled with the decision to come forward with allegations of racial discrimination. Wright has been with the network for a decade and now works as co-anchor of America’s News Headquarters on Saturdays:

“Somewhere along the line, (Fox) lost their way and they’ve failed to include equality for all,” Wright said. “The (network) failed to be fair and balanced for all of our employees regardless of race, gender, faith, creed or color.”

Wright says he was moved by the suit lodged by Tichaona Brown and Tabrese Wright, two black female accountants at the network, feeling he could no longer stay out of the issue.

“I prayed about it, I cried over it,” continued Kelly Wright, “I said, ‘I can no longer sit in silence, collect my paycheck, and act like I didn’t experience racial bias on my own level — an on-air personality.’”

About SouthernGirl2

A Native Texan who adores baby kittens, loves horses, rodeos, pomegranates, & collect Eagles. Enjoys politics, games shows, & dancing to all types of music. Loves discussing and learning about different cultures. A Phi Theta Kappa lifetime member with a passion for Social & Civil Justice.
This entry was posted in Current Events, News, Open Thread, Politics, Racial Oppression, Racism and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

88 Responses to Thursday Open Thread | Fox News anchor Kelly Wright says he can no longer ignore racism at the network

  1. eliihass says:

    “…To say the air was electric before Michelle Obama took the stage at the American Institute of Architects 2017 conference would be an understatement. Thousands lined up more than an hour early at the doors of the auditorium in Orlando’s Orange County Convention Center. Some sported “When they go low, we go high,” t-shirts. Even AIA president, Thomas Vonier, was giddy. “This is really happening,” he told a packed house of more than 10,000 architects.

    The former first lady of the United States, in her first public appearance since leaving the White House in January, was more pragmatic. She told Vonier, “It’s good to get out of the house.”

    Newfound freedom aside, she explained why she chose to speak at a conference catered to architects: “In my other life before I was the first lady, I worked in economic development and in planning … so I got to learn how important a role architects play in the lifeblood and of a city. [This conference] is a little full-circle for me.”

    Obama has spent considerable time lately looking at drawings and architectural models as she and her husband, alongside architects Tod Williams and Billie Tsien, plan the Barack Obama Presidential Center on the South Side of Chicago.

    The architectural community, in particular, was a pivotal focus of her conversation with Vonier, who was candid about the profession’s struggle to recruit and retain women and African-American architects.

    Though the AIA honored late architect Paul Revere Williams with its prestigious Gold Medal just moments before Obama’s talk, marking the first time an African-American architect has received the award since its establishment in 1947, less than two percent of members are black—a percentage Vonier said he was “ashamed” to name.

    “Can you give us any advice about things we can do better?” he asked Obama.

    Obama was frank. “You can’t be an architect if you don’t know architects exist,” she said, calling on the audience to mentor children as a means to raise the next, more diverse generation of architects and designers in a profession where young people of color lack role models. The same applies for empowering women in the workplace, according to Obama.

    Obama and Vonier’s conversation also covered how the former first family has been adjusting to life outside the White House. “[Our dogs] Bo and Sunny had never heard a doorbell,” she joked, going on to note the difficulties of ensuring that her two daughters would have a “normal” childhood. Obama described her family’s newfound civilian life as a relief; “It’s good not to have the weight of your world on your shoulders,” she said.

    Obama also dispelled rumors (and hopes) of a potential bid for public office. “It’s all well and good until you start running—then the knives come out,” she said. “As I’ve said, I wouldn’t ask my children to do this again, because when you run for high office, it’s not just you. It’s your whole family.”

    Instead, she is trying to make the most of her causes—ranging from girls’ education to childhood obesity—without the “mud fight” that is politics. Obama challenged the audience to do the same—to demonstrate their dedication to their communities through their work.

    “You don’t have to be first lady or President to influence,” she said.

  2. eliihass says:

    “…Closing the gender gap:

    Along those same lines, Vonier asked Obama what the quest for better work-life balance from the female perspective has meant to her.

    “It’s not easy,” she said, “and it’s never going to be. The one thing I can say to working mothers out there: Don’t beat up on yourselves. What you’re doing is hard, and we still don’t live in a society that supports it.”

    She noted that workplace policies like maternity and paternity leave still haven’t been implemented on a wide scale, forcing progressive employers to pick up the slack and employees with influence to fight for what they deserve. She shared a story about potentially returning to her job at the University of Chicago Medical Center after having children and asking for what she felt she deserved, including a larger salary and a flexible schedule. When her employer agreed to her terms in full, she quickly realized that she would have to go back to work; progress for her as a working mother would, in part, be progress for women as a whole.

    “If you have leverage, you have to push for the women who don’t,” she said.

    Building a diverse profession:

    Turning to the larger question of diversity within architecture, Vonier admitted, “Our ranks do not resemble the American population,” and asked Obama about her perspective on balancing imbalances and empowering underrepresented groups.

    “That’s not just the field of architecture,” Obama replied. “Look at law, look at science, look at so many professions. The struggle is still real. You can’t start recruiting from a pool that doesn’t exist. You have to build that pool, and you have to start at a young age.”

    “So many kids don’t even know what an architect is,” she added. “They don’t think about how buildings are built; they don’t know anything about developing or planning. I know I didn’t, and I was an educated kid. You have kids growing up in communities where people don’t even work, period, let alone as doctors or lawyers or architects.”

    “But that’s where all of you come in,” Obama insisted, asking the architects in the room to make an impact wherever they could. “You need to go to schools, neighborhoods, communities, any place where underrepresented minorities exist, and start talking. Start small. Make a friend.”

  3. eliihass says:

    “…ORLANDO, Fla. – Former First Lady Michelle Obama made her first public appearance after leaving the White House, in Orlando Thursday, talking about women’s rights and the need for inspiring young minds.

    She spoke at the American Institutes of Architects Conference being held at the Orange County Convention Center this week.

    Asked why she chose an architectural conference as her first speaking appearance, Obama said it was actually a fitting choice that brought her full circle to her past working in Chicago.

    “In my other life before I was first lady, I worked in the city, I worked in economic development and planning, I served on the historic preservation board for the city of Chicago,” Obama said.

    The Obamas are currently in the middle of designing the Obama Presidential Center in Chicago.

    It’s also now no longer a secret, but a popular topic in the architectural community, that President Obama once thought about becoming an architect.

    During the course of the talk with AIA president Thomas Vonier, Obama touched on many of the issues she is passionate about and started programs for during her time serving as first lady.

    Vonier acknowledge that the industry has far to go in terms of diversity and asked Obama how they can continue to increase the number of women and minorities entering the field.

    “We have work to do, our ranks do not resemble the American population,” Vonier said.

    Obama said the problem isn’t just with the architectural industry, but with science, technology and math too. She advised everyone in the audience to mentor young people to help grow the crop of upcoming talent.

    “So many kids don’t even know what an architect is,” she said. “You can’t be an architect if you don’t know that architects exist.”

    The Harvard Law School graduate said she wished she had known all her options as a young woman and that’s why education is so important for young girls.

    Obama launched Let Girls Learn in 2015, a program to help young women get better access to education.

    Vonier pressed Obama about a possible run for elected office of her own, but she responded that she felt she didn’t need to be a politician to help her community.

    Obama said that she hopes removing politics from the equation might help people who didn’t like her before to be able to hear her out now on important issues, like childhood obesity and women’s health.

    “Maybe, just maybe, if we walk away from this mud fight, they’ll be able to hear some of the good things that I have that can help everyone and we can do more for more people,” Obama said…”

  4. rikyrah says:

    Verbally incontinent man-child who thinks he’s moving toy soldiers around – description of Dolt45 on Larry O tonight

  5. The entire network should be shut down. It’s a haven for predators to prey on women. @MaxineWaters called it a sexual harassment enterprise

    • eliihass says:

      There are few more evil than this despicable racist who’s been allowed to run amok for years, poisoning and further damaging our already fragile union…

      Karma can’t visit him soon enough

  6. rikyrah says:

    Trump drives bipartisanship out of the political conversation
    04/27/17 12:54 PM
    By Steve Benen


    HuffPost’s Jason Linkins had a piece several weeks ago that’s been on my mind lately about how the chorus of calls for bipartisanship has “fallen silent” now that Trump’s in the Oval Office.

    It’s worth pointing out because during the Obama era, the demand that he remain true to bipartisanship was constant. The entire notion of presidential “leadership,” during Obama’s tenure, was entirely contingent upon his willingness to break with those that had voted him into office and deliver policies that they would almost certainly despise, like deep and immiserating cuts to earned benefit programs like Social Security and Medicare.

    If Obama wasn’t trying to reach some sort of across-the-aisle grand bargain, then he was failing, in the eyes of pundits. And whenever Obama managed to deliver on middle-of-the-road policies, well ― those same pundits moved the goalposts. Journalist and political commentator Greg Sargent called it “the centrist dodge,” and it, too, was a constant feature of the Obama era.

    During the long and tortuous legislative process that eventually brought us the Affordable Care Act, the bipartisanship police pulled double-shifts on their beat, raising a hue and cry whenever it looked like developments weren’t going to yield the optimal center-right health care package. The media practically fulminated against the so-called “public option,” dismissing the strong and consistent public support for it out of hand. Whenever it seemed like the Democrats might have to take a parliamentary short-cut ― like the brief flirtation with “deem and pass,” the Beltway press erupted in a chorus of disapproval.

  7. rikyrah says:

    They settled with Dr. Dao.

    UNDER 30 DAYS it took for United to pay him.


  8. rikyrah says:

    The Far Left Is Still Out Of Touch With Black Voters

    This week, the internet was set ablaze with hot takes relating to former President Obama’s decision to get paid to speak at a healthcare conference. The conference was organized by Cantor Fitzgerald, a bond firm, which apparently makes it an enemy of state to the far left. The consensus among the far left is that Obama’s decision to get paid to speak is evidence of political corruption. On its face, this is just an absurd statement with no basis in fact: Obama is legally barred from running for President again, and his wife, Michelle Obama, has repeated indicated she has no interest in politics. How can the money be a bribe for the Obamas if they have no future in public office?

    But when you dig deeper to the root of the criticism, you start to see some ugly truths about the far left and race in America. You start to see why Sanders’ movement was overwhelmingly white and struggled mightily to get the support of the people of color they needed to have any chance at winning the primary. There is a major disconnect between Sanders and his followers and the majority of Black voters in this country, and the latest spat with Obama is just the most recent indication of that.


    The Vitriolic Criticism Of Obama Highlights Black Voters’ Problems With The Far Left
    In late 2016, nearly 9 out of 10 Black voters approved of President Obama. To many Black voters, he is the symbol of success for Black America. You might not agree with everything he has done, and I certainly haven’t agreed with everything, but you have to respect him for what he means to Black Americans-making it to the height of American politics and withstanding eight years of racist attacks. Sanders and his movement see Obama as symbolic of evil neoliberal corporate interests. Therein lies the disconnect. The far right holds disdain for Obama for some of the same reasons that the far left does: they see him as beholden to special interests instead of “those of the people.”
    Black people can see this, they aren’t stupid. They see that the political fringe on the left and most of the right hates Obama for some of the same reasons. So when the far left comes out and says that the first Black President should be held to a different standard than Presidents before him — that he doesn’t deserve to get paid for his post-Presidential work or shouldn’t be compensated — the Black community feels that one of its largest symbols of success is under attack from an overwhelmingly white political movement.
    Why does the far left believe the first Black president should be held to a standard of making less money? Why does the far left believe that the first Black president doesn’t deserve to be compensated for his work? These are the issues that resonate with the black community. The rebuttal will be, well, the money is corporate, the money is from Wall Street. Well, nobody in the far left was coming for Sanders when he invested his money on Wall Street. Nobody on the far left was coming for The Young Turks when they took $4 million from Republicans. There are a plethora of organizations and publications on the far left that take big money from corporate donors, Republicans, and Wall Street investment bankers. But they are not viciously attacked for making money or taking in millions in donations. Why do they hold the first Black President to a standard they don’t hold themselves to? They haven’t just come for Obama either. They’ve heavily criticized activist DeRay and the Black women behind Safety Pin Box for making money for their work, accusing them of being beholden to corporate interests. When Obama, DeRay, or Safety Pin Box is making money, all of a sudden the far left has a problem with it. But when their own organizations and publications are taking Wall Street or corporate donations, there is no anger, no criticism, no vitriol.
    Do you see how Black people see this? How we look at this and say “They don’t want Black people to succeed or to be represented in politics, business, or media? They don’t want Black people to make money?” This is a movement that hates identity politics, refused to campaign in the diverse southern states, and calls out prominent successful Black people for getting paid for their work. Vox wrote an article saying that Obama shouldn’t have taken the money not because it was corruption (it clearly wasn’t) but because of the optics could make it appear so. Well, think about how the optics of how the far left appears to Black people. From a Black perspective, you can see how the far left and the far right’s criticisms of prominent Black people appear very similar?

  9. rikyrah says:

    A well placed source is telling me-IC has tape that was delivered to Moscow by Page. Details hacking for removing sanctions. Quid Pro Quo.

    — Claude Taylor (@TrueFactsStated) April 27, 2017

  10. Breaking News: United has reached a settlement with Dr Dao

  11. rikyrah says:

    .@SpeakerRyan: “People will be better off under pre-existing conditions with our plan.”

    — Phil Mattingly (@Phil_Mattingly) April 27, 2017

    Not a small lie. Not a depends-on-your-perspective lie. A huge, Trump-like, don’t-give-a-shit-what-you-think lie.

    — Jon Favreau (@jonfavs) April 27, 2017

  12. rikyrah says:

    Watching from my window at work, Urban Prep is going their College Choice Day in Daley Plaza.. The young men look so handsome in their blazers. It’s nice to see people stopping to cheer them on.

  13. rikyrah says:

    The Case Against Single-Payer
    Progressives have increasingly embraced the idea of “Medicare for All,” but a public option would more tangibly ameliorate our healthcare woes.
    by Joel Dodge
    April 27, 2017

    Cast out of government, the Democratic Party is up for grabs. And single-payer healthcare has become one of the key fronts in the battle to define the party’s future.

    Take the special election in Georgia’s sixth congressional district, where Democratic candidate Jon Ossoff recently found himself in hot water with progressives for his failure to endorse single-payer. “I think we should be focused on incremental progress based upon the body of law on the books,” Ossoff explained, “rather than going back to square one and proceeding from a starting point of ideological purity.”

    This sparked a wave of skepticism of Ossoff among a segment of the left. When asked whether Ossoff is a progressive, Sen. Bernie Sanders flatly answered, “I don’t know.” Sanders’s aides pointed to Ossoff’s silence on single-payer as one reason for progressives to be lukewarm toward his candidacy.

    Ossoff’s campaign has been analyzed through the prism of the Democratic Party’s internal fight. His incremental theory of healthcare progress eschews Sanders’s social democratic revolution for the pragmatism of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. And while some urge Democrats to adopt a more distinctly working-class politics, Ossoff’s high-profile candidacy in a suburban district has kept a middle-class appeal at the party’s forefront. “Ossoff is showing us the path to retaking the House,” tweeted former Clinton aide Brian Fallon. “It runs through the Panera Breads of America.” To which Jacobin magazine contributor Matt Karp quipped: “Two paths forward for the Democratic Party: Medicare For All, or the Fuji Apple Salad with Chicken.”

    Meanwhile, progressive enthusiasm for single-payer healthcare is ascendant. Buoyed by the fiery collapse of the GOP’s Obamacare repeal effort, progressives have been quick to promote single-payer as the next horizon in health reform. Rep. John Conyers’s perennial single-payer bill quickly racked up more House co-sponsors than ever before.

    There’s a lot to like about single-payer healthcare, but making support for single-payer a litmus test for true progressivism dismisses the learned wisdom of recent generations of health reformers. There might be a better way to make progress toward the vision of single-payer—one grounded in the center-left tradition of pragmatism and incremental reform.

  14. vitaminlover says:

    Very good, Mr. Wright.

  15. rikyrah says:

    A Case Study in Trump Chaos: NAFTA
    by Nancy LeTourneau April 27, 2017 10:11 AM

    Yesterday the headlines blared, “Donald Trump to sign executive order withdrawing US from Nafta.” Given that the plan was to sign the order this week, it was obvious that the desperation the White House is feeling about propping up Trump’s ego heading into his 100th day in office was the big driver.

    But twenty-four hours later, the story has flipped to, “Trump Rules Out Swift Nafta Exit in Favor of Renegotiation.” How and why did things change so dramatically in just one day? The answer to that question provides us with a case study in why chaos continues to reign in the Trump administration.

    First of all, the battle for the so-called “Game of Thrones” continues.

    President Donald Trump’s top advisers are embroiled in a debate over how aggressively to proceed on reshaping U.S. participation in the North American Free Trade Agreement, with hard-liners favoring a threatened withdrawal as soon as this week and others advocating for a more measured approach to reopening negotiations with Canada and Mexico.

    We’ve come to know the players pretty well. On one side are the nativists like Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, head of Trump’s National Trade Council. On the other side is the Goldman Sachs wing of the cabinet led by Gary Cohn, Director of the National Economic Council. Members of Congress joined the latter group.

  16. rikyrah says:

    Minority Leader Pelosi is standing strong.

    In case that is unclear, here’s the summary. Initially Mulvaney said the administration would continue funding the subsidies if Democrats would agree to funding for the border wall. Pelosi basically responded by saying, “No!” Mulvaney backed off on the border wall funding. Then Pelosi set her terms: either fund the subsidies or we walk.

  17. rikyrah says:

    Ivanka Trump’s Fund for Female Entrepreneurs Requires Scrutiny
    by Nancy LeTourneau April 27, 2017 8:00 AM

    Mike Allen reports that Ivanka Trump is setting up a fund for female entrepreneurs.

    Ivanka Trump told me yesterday from Berlin that she has begun building a massive fund that will benefit female entrepreneurs around the globe. Both countries and companies will contribute to create a pool of capital to economically empower women.

    In later reports he says that the fund will be managed by the World Bank — although that is still to be confirmed. But obviously this raises a lot of questions. Dan Primack highlights six of them.

    Will these be investments seeking to generate a financial return, or will they be some sort of grant or loan?
    Who will be on the investment committee? Will they receive financial compensation?
    Are Trump, Powell or other White House employees actively soliciting contributions from foreign governments and/or private institutions (banks, foundations, etc.)? If so, has White House counsel signed off on it?
    Will the fund solicit capital from U.S. state pension funds, as do many more traditional private equity funds.
    Will the fund be registered with the SEC?
    How will the fund balance interests of U.S. companies that could receive direct competition from foreign startups that receive investment?

    As I’ve already mentioned, the Trump family’s pattern means that Ivanka’s efforts require close scrutiny. Should she fail to be transparent in providing information, that would pose an even bigger issue. So let’s hold Ivanka accountable. But it would be unwise to simply condemn any effort to initiate public/private partnerships within the White House to address domestic or global issues.

  18. rikyrah says:

    The ‘Game of Thrones’ Administration Can’t Hire Staff
    by Nancy LeTourneau April 26, 2017 3:36 PM

    According to a Washington Post tracker, Trump has nominated just 37 people to fill the 530 remaining vacant senior-level jobs requiring Senate confirmation. The president has been all over the map in explaining this one. At times, he blames Democrats in Senate for obstruction – which is hard to do when he hasn’t even submitted nominations. At other times, he says he’s not interested in filling all those positions.

    Trump, in an exclusive interview Tuesday with “Fox & Friends,” suggested his lack of political appointees is less about a difficulty in finding eager candidates and more about a desire for a leaner government operation.

    “When I see a story about ‘Donald Trump didn’t fill hundreds and hundreds of jobs,’ it’s because, in many cases, we don’t want to fill those jobs,” Trump said.

    As is often the case with Trump, he simply says whatever suits him in the moment or whatever he thinks his audience wants to hear.

  19. rikyrah says:

    Looking past governance, Team Trump places a high value on theatrics
    04/27/17 10:13 AM—UPDATED 04/27/17 10:32 AM
    By Steve Benen

    White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer was asked a couple of weeks ago about Donald Trump’s 100th day in office, and what the president will have to show for his efforts. “I think what you’ve seen out of this White House,” Spicer replied, “is a very robust agenda of activity.”

    I found myself thinking about that phrase quite a bit. The president’s press secretary didn’t focus much on actual substantive gains, but rather, the robust amount of “activity” in and around the White House. Trump and his team may not have accomplishments to speak of, but we’re apparently supposed to marvel at how busy they appear doing … stuff.

    Yesterday offered an amazing peek into the Trump administration’s approach to pseudo governance.

    * Tax reform: The White House unveiled a one-page tax “plan” that didn’t actually say much of anything. It looked like a table of contents without any contents. Team Trump assured the public that officials are “working on” producing “lots” of details that aren’t yet ready. Why not wait and unveil a proper plan once it’s complete? Because that’s not theatrical – and with the 100-day standard approaching, we apparently need to be reminded of the president’s “robust agenda of activity.”

  20. rikyrah says:

    A suggestion from BJ:

    I spent today’s phone call to DC demanding that my Congressman force the White House to turn over documents about Flynn. And demanding that he vote to release Trump’s taxes.

    “He’s got two choices: he can help Americans find out the truth. Or he can be part of the cover-up.”

  21. rikyrah says:

    Before all this Trump shit, I understood MLK’s point that the white moderate is worse than the KKK, but didn’t “get it.”

    I think I do now.

    — Elliott Lusztig (@ezlusztig) April 27, 2017

  22. rikyrah says:

    While Ivanka Trump sits on panel discussing global women’s issues…her dad is busy cutting ALL funding for Office of Global Women’s Issues.— Tanya (@tgreene319) April 27, 2017

  23. Jeff Sessions Criminal Complaint – Perjury, False Statements, Cover Up

    [scribd id=343199779 key=key-VxUAHNhtMRwYEJd5T6Rx mode=scroll]

  24. rikyrah says:

    If it hasn’t been mentioned here before, Resistbot will fax messages for you. If you text RESIST to 50409, it’ll take you through the set-up process. It will fax whatever you text to it to both of your Senators and your Congresscritter

  25. rikyrah says:

    That’s right, 25 MILLION Americans could lose health care coverage under the #AHCA’s new MacArthur amendment! TAKE ACTION: 1-844-222-0110

    — AARP Advocates (@AARPadvocates) April 27, 2017

  26. rikyrah says:

    Referring to nearly 1 MILLION SENIORS who would lose Medicaid coverage; they’d still have Medicare so call it losing 1/2 coverage, I guess.

    — ☪️ Charles Gaba ✡️ (@charles_gaba) April 27, 2017

  27. rikyrah says:

    In a way, screwing with the individual market is a smokescreen. AHCA still ends Medicaid expansion and slow-strangles all Medicaid.

    — xpostfactoid (@xpostfactoid) April 27, 2017

  28. Breaking News: The Inspector General has opened Flynn investigation

  29. rikyrah says:

    Booker: Public pushback stopped Trumpcare, may be needed again
    Senator Cory Booker talks with Rachel Maddow about attempts to resurrect a Republican plan to dismantle Obamacare and the resistance such a move is likely to encounter in the Senate and with the American public.

  30. rikyrah says:

    White House hypes ‘OK’ North Korea briefing for senators
    Rachel Maddow looks at escalating tensions between the United States and North Korea and the peculiar, special all-senators briefing by the White House that left attendees underwhelmed.

  31. rikyrah says:

    Jared Kushner courts scandal with sketchy business backers
    Rachel Maddow shares new reporting from the New York Times that Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner’s secret financial backers are a family with businesses under investigation for corruption.

  32. rikyrah says:

    Republican health plan at the end of a trail of broken promises
    04/27/17 08:00 AM—UPDATED 04/27/17 08:04 AM
    By Steve Benen

    Donald Trump was never specific about the substantive details of his health care plan, but he wasn’t shy about telling Americans exactly what his policy would do and what the system would look like once it was in place.

    “We’re going to have insurance for everybody,” he vowed. The Republican added that once the Affordable Care Act is replaced with his plan, we’d see lower premiums, “much lower” deductibles, and a system in which all Americans are “beautifully covered.”

    This wasn’t just campaign palaver, ad-libbed during a rally, from a candidate pleading for support from unsuspecting voters. Rather, these were commitments Trump made after he’d won the presidential election.

    The president then proceeded to break his word without explanation, throwing his support behind congressional Republicans’ American Health Care Act, which would take coverage from tens of millions of people, raise premiums, and raise deductibles. How does Trump explain his failure to follow through on his commitments? So far, he hasn’t even tried to justify the shift.

    But on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, the congressional Republicans find themselves in the exact same position. When House GOP leaders unveiled their health plan last month, they also created a website to answer the public’s questions. As of this morning, it still says the Republican proposal “prohibits health insurers from denying coverage or charging more money to patients based on pre-existing conditions,” which is the opposite of what the latest iteration of their legislation does. The Q&A portion adds:

    Are you repealing patient protections, including for people with pre-existing conditions?

    No. Americans should never be denied coverage or charged more because of a pre-existing condition. […]

    Won’t millions of Americans lose their health insurance because of your plan?

    No. We are working to give all Americans peace of mind about their health care.

    This is the exact opposite of the truth. Under the latest version of the Republican plan, protections for Americans with pre-existing conditions would be gutted, and tens of millions of people would lose their health coverage.

  33. rikyrah says:

    Trump does himself no favors with attacks on the federal judiciary
    04/27/17 09:20 AM
    By Steve Benen

    In his 2010 State of the Union address, then-President Barack Obama expressed his dissatisfaction with the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling.

    “With all due deference to separation of powers,” Obama said, “last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that, I believe, will open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections. And I urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps correct some of these problems.”

    Conservatives, the media, and many prominent figures in the legal community responded with a spirited freak-out – not to defend the Citizens United rulings, but to balk at the president’s public concerns. Americans were told that the remarks, delivered in front of several justices who were on hand for the address, represented an assault on the federal judiciary. A debate ensued about whether Obama had gone too far.

    Seven years later, with Donald Trump continuing to rant and rave about federal courts that refuse to do what he wants them to do, the complaints from 2010 seem almost quaint.

    President Trump said Wednesday that he has “absolutely” considered proposals that would split up the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, where judges have blocked two of his executive actions.

    “Absolutely, I have,” Trump said of considering 9th Circuit breakup proposals during a far-ranging interview with the Washington Examiner at the White House. “There are many people that want to break up the 9th Circuit. It’s outrageous.”

  34. rikyrah says:

    Trump agrees to let his health care hostage go (for now)
    04/27/17 08:40 AM
    By Steve Benen

    Exactly two weeks ago, Donald Trump publicly acknowledged a not-so-subtle hostage strategy he thought, at the time, would be a good idea. The Republican president said he was prepared to destroy American health care markets by withholding cost-sharing subsidies – unless congressional Democrats took steps to make him happy.

    Trump said on Twitter that he didn’t “want people to get hurt,” before suggesting he’d start hurting people.

    Yesterday, the White House decided to let the hostage go – at least for now.

    White House officials notified lawmakers earlier in the day that President Trump abandoned a threat to end subsidy payments under the Affordable Care Act, a concession to Democrats that is expected to clear the way for a bipartisan budget agreement. Trump had threatened to cut off the subsidies in an attempt to force Democrats to pay for a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico, a fight that became less serious after Republicans withdrew their border wall request this week.

    “It is good that once again the president seems to be backing off his threat to hold health care and government funding hostage,” Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said. “Like the withdrawal of money for the wall, this decision brings us closer to a bipartisan agreement to fund the government and is good news for the American people.”

  35. rikyrah says:

    Trumpcare wins Freedom Caucus, loses moderates (& maybe GA-6?)
    Republicans are rapidly shifting positions on the Obamacare repeal bill. The Freedom Caucus now supports the bill, but moderates are backing away. Former GOP Rep. David Jolly and Vox health care reporter Sarah Kliff join Lawrence O’Donnell.

  36. rikyrah says:

    “It’s Been Chaos”

    How our panel of frustrated Republican voters view Trump’s first 100 days.

    By Seth Stevenson

    Last year, I began talking to a panel of Republican voters who weren’t fond of Donald Trump. I spoke to them during the primaries in March, after Trump became the presumptive nominee in May, and just before the election at the end of October. This was never a scientific undertaking—my sample size is tiny, found through my own social and professional networks. It’s just been a glimpse into the thought processes of some longtime Republicans who are deeply uncomfortable with the idea of Trump as the face of their party. With the 100-day mark of the new administration nearing, I thought I’d check in with them once again to see how they’re feeling about the Trump era.

  37. rikyrah says:

    Lawrence on Trump’s disastrous one-page tax proposal rollout
    The White House unveiled a one-page outline of their tax proposal, providing almost no detail about what the final plan will look like. But one thing we do know: the wealthy would get a massive tax cut. Lawrence O’Donnell speaks with David Cay Johnston and Adam Jentleson.

  38. rikyrah says:

    It appears President Trump’s tax proposal was designed by billionaires for billionaires.

    — Bill de Blasio (@NYCMayor) April 26, 2017

  39. rikyrah says:

    uh uh uh
    uh uh uh

    Sandi Jackson to Jesse Jr.: List all sex partners—names and dates
    CHICAGO 04/26/2017, 07:52pm
    Tina Sfondeles

    Sandi Jackson has requested the names, phone numbers and addresses of any sexual partners Jesse Jackson Jr. may have had during their 26-year marriage.

    As one chapter in the contentious divorce case ends, another begins.

    That request was made on March 31, according to a filing in Washington, D.C. — which is where the former political power couple’s divorce case will be settled.

    Jesse Jackson Jr. on Wednesday filed court papers saying he’s choosing to dismiss divorce proceedings in Chicago — allowing the case to continue solely in the nation’s capital.

    Documents filed last month in Washington, D.C., show Sandi Jackson’s attorneys requested that the former congressman “state the name, telephone number, and address of each and every person other than the Plaintiff with whom you had sexual relations since the date of your marriage to the Plaintiff and the date and location of each and every such incidence of sexual relations.”

    The requests made March 31 had to pertain to the question of jurisdiction in Washington and temporary alimony — not the entire divorce case.

  40. rikyrah says:

    They are trying to take away healthcare from 24 million people again…

    Time to call Congress:

    These are the GOPers whose district was won by Hillary Clinton in 2016 – call them:

    California 10 R+1 Jeff Denham
    California 21 D+2 David Valadao
    Arizona 2 R+3 Martha McSally
    California 25 R+3 Steve Knight
    California 39 R+5 Ed Royce
    California 45 R+7 Mimi Walters
    California 48 R+7 Dana Rohrabacher
    California 49 R+4 Darrell Issa
    Colorado 6 D+1 Mike Coffman
    Florida 26 EVEN Carlos Curbelo
    Florida 27 R+1 Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
    Illinois 6 R+4 Peter Roskam
    Kansas 3 R+6 Kevin Yoder
    Minnesota 3 R+2 Erik Paulsen
    New Jersey 7 R+6 Leonard Lance
    Pennsylvania 6 R+2 Ryan Costello
    Pennsylvania 7 R+2 Patrick Meehan
    Texas 7 R+13 John Culberson
    Texas 23 R+3 Will Hurd
    Texas 32 R+10 Pete Sessions
    Virginia 10 R+2 Barbara Comstock
    Washington 8 R+1 Dave Reichert

  41. rikyrah says:

    Good Morning, Everyone 😄😄😄

Leave a Reply